Is it defeatist to suggest that if Murray and Nadal meet in Monte Carlo, the chances are Nadal will win?

Some people can't quite seem to grasp that people will have different opinions to them. Murray is not going to win every single match. There are going to be opponents who cause him real problems. What's defeatist about pointing that out?

If people want just utter blind faith and don't actually want to discuss things with some perspective, perhaps they should venture over to andymurray.com.

It's realistic to say that Nadal is the (firm) favourite, but it is defeatist to presume he will always win.

Indeed. And no-one has said he will always win, or that Murray will definitely lose to this player or in that round.

People being worried about potential match-ups or thinking Murray won't win a clay title is not being bloody defeatist. I really wish the holier-than-thou posters would stop attacking anyone who proffers an opinion or airs a view that isn't 100% optimistic. This isn't a Federer forum.

Is it defeatist to suggest that if Murray and Nadal meet in Monte Carlo, the chances are Nadal will win?

Some people can't quite seem to grasp that people will have different opinions to them. Murray is not going to win every single match. There are going to be opponents who cause him real problems. What's defeatist about pointing that out?

If people want just utter blind faith and don't actually want to discuss things with some perspective, perhaps they should venture over to andymurray.com.

Unfortunately MW has always had its fair share of wearers of rose-tinted specs. Andy has always been realistic so I don't see why some of his fans find it so difficult to be the same.

Indeed. And no-one has said he will always win, or that Murray will definitely lose to this player or in that round.

People being worried about potential match-ups or thinking Murray won't win a clay title is not being bloody defeatist. I really wish the holier-than-thou posters would stop attacking anyone who proffers an opinion or airs a view that isn't 100% optimistic. This isn't a Federer forum.

No need to be rude. All I did was give my view on the difference between being defeatist and being realistic. You are reading way too much into it if you think it's "holier-than-thou", and I'd suggest you are the one handing out the rows, so if you don't like it, don't do it.

Andy has always been realistic, but you won't catch him saying he won't win. He'll just say it's tough.

If Andy actually beat Nadal at this years Monte Carlo, it would be a real cause for rejoicing for his fans . Everyone else would say that Andy's win was because Nadal is not yet up to his normal standard of play. That's being realistic